Asp Forum - Ruby equivalent of Lex (or Flex)?

Tom Payne

1/5/2006 4:47:00 PM

I'm interested in writing compilers in Ruby. It appears that Racc is
a suitable replacement for Yacc, but I've not found any replacement
for Lex. I've probably missed something. In any case, I'd much
appreciate some help in finding something.

Thanks in advance,
Tom Payne

7 Answers

Justin Collins

1/5/2006 8:50:00 PM

Rex?

http://raa.ruby-lang.org/pr...

-Justin

Tom Payne wrote:
> I'm interested in writing compilers in Ruby. It appears that Racc is
> a suitable replacement for Yacc, but I've not found any replacement
> for Lex. I've probably missed something. In any case, I'd much
> appreciate some help in finding something.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom Payne
>
>

MenTaLguY

1/5/2006 9:26:00 PM

It's worth noting that, thanks to grammarian Martin Traverso, the
latest version of ANTLR v3 can generate parsers in Ruby.

http://split-s.blogspot.com/2005/12/antlr-for...

It's still pre-alpha, but things only get better from here!

I believe there's also a native Ruby port of ANTLR v2 bopping about
out there, though google isn't helping me out much right now.

A decent LL parser generator really is worth it, though. LALR
sucks.

Incidentally, it looks like Martin will be writing much of the ANTLR
v3 grammar for Ruby. He's got quite a bit done in SVN already.

-mental

Doug H

1/5/2006 9:31:00 PM

Two popular parser generators have or will have ruby support:

ANTLR 3.0 (still in alpha and likely to remain so for another year or
two) will have ruby support too apparently:
http://split-s.blogspot.com/2005/12/antlr-for...
They are even working on an antlr 3.0 grammar for ruby itself:
http://rubyforge.org/projects/r...

Also (not in alpha), there is a ruby version of Coco:
http://www.ssw.uni-linz.ac.at/Research/Proj...
http://www.zenspider.com/ZSS/Produ...
http://rubyforge.org/projects/...

marcman

1/15/2010 2:45:00 AM

> >> In
> >> addition, that $500M was for five years and at least some of the costs
> >> of producing his two channels came out of it.
>
> >I don't remember anything about the part that he had to pay for his
> >own production (or studio), but of course you could be right, may I
> >ask where you know that from?
>
> News coverage at the time. I could dig for links, but I don't care
> that much about it.
>
> Oh wait - the SEC filing:
>
> http://www.secinfo.com/dsvR...
>

Bad link. Just a landing page for all SIRI's filings.

I did some Googling, came across an article from the Washington Post
dated 10/7/2005:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10953-200...

Sirius Lands a Big Dog: Howard Stern
Shock Jock Is Jumping to Satellite Radio Network

excerpts:

The raunchy radio morning man stunned his staff by saying he has
signed a five-year, $500 million deal with Sirius Satellite
Radio . . .

Joseph P. Clayton, chief executive of New York-based Sirius
said . . . Sirius, which has 600,000 subscribers, can turn a profit
on the deal -- which includes a new studio and salaries for Stern and
his on-air gang -- if the move attracts 1 million new paying
customers. Stern's show is estimated to draw more than 10 million
listeners.

===

I dunno, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that's telling me that Stern
didn't foot the bill that we're discussing out of his end. At the very
least, maybe he would have (?) had he not attracted 1M subscribers
(which he did)?

==

Here's another link: http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/04/fisher_...

Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher was online to discuss the
announcement

excerpt:

Centreville, Va.: Will Sirius actually be able to garner the
additional one million subscribers they say they need to sustain
Stern's contract?

Marc Fisher: The numbers in today's press release seem wildly
inflated. There's no way it will cost Sirius anything close to $100
million a year to produce the Stern show, even including His Media
Highness' fabulous salary. And there's no way Sirius needs an extra
million subscribers to make money off Stern. But could he bring in
that million folks? Quite possible, if satellite radio continues at
the growth rate we've seen in recent months. XM, for example, took two
years to get its first million subscribers, but only eight months to
add the second million. XM is now at about 2.5 million subscribers
while Sirius lags far behind at 600,000.

==

I'm confused, how are you reading this? If you have the time . . .

marcman

1/15/2010 2:59:00 AM

On Jan 14, 9:44 pm, marcman <marcmanstud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> In
> > >> addition, that $500M was for five years and at least some of the costs
> > >> of producing his two channels came out of it.
>
> > >I don't remember anything about the part that he had to pay for his
> > >own production (or studio), but of course you could be right, may I
> > >ask where you know that from?
>
> > News coverage at the time. I could dig for links, but I don't care
> > that much about it.
>
> > Oh wait - the SEC filing:
>
> >http://www.secinfo.com/dsvR...
>
> Bad link. Just a landing page for all SIRI's filings.
>
> I did some Googling, came across an article from the Washington Post
> dated 10/7/2005:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10953-200...
>
> Sirius Lands a Big Dog: Howard Stern
> Shock Jock Is Jumping to Satellite Radio Network
>
> excerpts:
>
> The raunchy radio morning man stunned his staff by saying he has
> signed a five-year, $500 million deal with Sirius Satellite
> Radio . . .
>
> Joseph P. Clayton, chief executive of New York-based Sirius
> said . . . Sirius, which has 600,000 subscribers, can turn a profit
> on the deal -- which includes a new studio and salaries for Stern and
> his on-air gang -- if the move attracts 1 million new paying
> customers. Stern's show is estimated to draw more than 10 million
> listeners.
>
> ===
>
> I dunno, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that's telling me that Stern
> didn't foot the bill that we're discussing out of his end. At the very
> least, maybe he would have (?) had he not attracted 1M subscribers
> (which he did)?
>
> ==
>
> Here's another link: http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/04/fisher_...
>
> Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher was online to discuss the
> announcement
>
> excerpt:
>
> Centreville, Va.: Will Sirius actually be able to garner the
> additional one million subscribers they say they need to sustain
> Stern's contract?
>
> Marc Fisher: The numbers in today's press release seem wildly
> inflated. There's no way it will cost Sirius anything close to $100
> million a year to produce the Stern show, even including His Media
> Highness' fabulous salary. And there's no way Sirius needs an extra
> million subscribers to make money off Stern. But could he bring in
> that million folks? Quite possible, if satellite radio continues at
> the growth rate we've seen in recent months. XM, for example, took two
> years to get its first million subscribers, but only eight months to
> add the second million. XM is now at about 2.5 million subscribers
> while Sirius lags far behind at 600,000.
>
> ==
>
> I'm confused, how are you reading this? If you have the time . . .

One more tidbit: http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/07/oprah-stern-letterman-tech-media-cx_lr_0207talk...

Forbes
The Best-Paid Talking Heads
Lacey Rose, 02.07.07, 2:45 PM ET

excerpts:

Some say talk is cheap. But not for the best-paid talk show hosts on
television and radio.

Case in point: Howard Stern. The King of All Media earned $302 million
in just 12 months.

In 2004, Sirius Satellite Radio (nasdaq: SIRI - news - people ) agreed
to shell out $500 million over five years to snag the shock jock--and
that doesn’t include a slew of bonuses, like the 22.1 million shares,
valued at $82.9 million, that he received earlier this year for
beating 2006 subscriber targets.

==

I think this clears it up, no? $500 million for five years *plus*
stock.

marcman

1/15/2010 3:19:00 AM

On Jan 14, 9:58 pm, marcman <marcmanstud...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 14, 9:44 pm, marcman <marcmanstud...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > > >> In
> > > >> addition, that $500M was for five years and at least some of the costs
> > > >> of producing his two channels came out of it.
>
> > > >I don't remember anything about the part that he had to pay for his
> > > >own production (or studio), but of course you could be right, may I
> > > >ask where you know that from?
>
> > > News coverage at the time. I could dig for links, but I don't care
> > > that much about it.
>
> > > Oh wait - the SEC filing:
>
> > >http://www.secinfo.com/dsvR...
>
> > Bad link. Just a landing page for all SIRI's filings.
>
> > I did some Googling, came across an article from the Washington Post
> > dated 10/7/2005:
>
> >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10953-200...
>
> > Sirius Lands a Big Dog: Howard Stern
> > Shock Jock Is Jumping to Satellite Radio Network
>
> > excerpts:
>
> > The raunchy radio morning man stunned his staff by saying he has
> > signed a five-year, $500 million deal with Sirius Satellite
> > Radio . . .
>
> > Joseph P. Clayton, chief executive of New York-based Sirius
> > said . . . Sirius, which has 600,000 subscribers, can turn a profit
> > on the deal -- which includes a new studio and salaries for Stern and
> > his on-air gang -- if the move attracts 1 million new paying
> > customers. Stern's show is estimated to draw more than 10 million
> > listeners.
>
> > ===
>
> > I dunno, maybe I'm reading it wrong, but that's telling me that Stern
> > didn't foot the bill that we're discussing out of his end. At the very
> > least, maybe he would have (?) had he not attracted 1M subscribers
> > (which he did)?
>
> > ==
>
> > Here's another link: http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/04/fisher_...
>
> > Washington Post columnist Marc Fisher was online to discuss the
> > announcement
>
> > excerpt:
>
> > Centreville, Va.: Will Sirius actually be able to garner the
> > additional one million subscribers they say they need to sustain
> > Stern's contract?
>
> > Marc Fisher: The numbers in today's press release seem wildly
> > inflated. There's no way it will cost Sirius anything close to $100
> > million a year to produce the Stern show, even including His Media
> > Highness' fabulous salary. And there's no way Sirius needs an extra
> > million subscribers to make money off Stern. But could he bring in
> > that million folks? Quite possible, if satellite radio continues at
> > the growth rate we've seen in recent months. XM, for example, took two
> > years to get its first million subscribers, but only eight months to
> > add the second million. XM is now at about 2.5 million subscribers
> > while Sirius lags far behind at 600,000.
>
> > ==
>
> > I'm confused, how are you reading this? If you have the time . . .
>
> One more tidbit: http://www.forbes.com/2007/02/07/oprah-stern-letterman-tech......
>
> Forbes
> The Best-Paid Talking Heads
> Lacey Rose, 02.07.07, 2:45 PM ET
>
> excerpts:
>
> Some say talk is cheap. But not for the best-paid talk show hosts on
> television and radio.
>
> Case in point: Howard Stern. The King of All Media earned $302 million
> in just 12 months.
>
> In 2004, Sirius Satellite Radio (nasdaq: SIRI - news - people ) agreed
> to shell out $500 million over five years to snag the shock jock--and
> that doesn’t include a slew of bonuses, like the 22.1 million shares,
> valued at $82.9 million, that he received earlier this year for
> beating 2006 subscriber targets.
>
> ==
>
> I think this clears it up, no? $500 million for five years *plus*
> stock.

Perhaps not.

From the Washington Examiner, 12/22/09

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/entertainment/howard-stern-says-hed-quit-sirius-but-the-satellite-radio-operator-has-more-clout-now-798...

excerpt:

Sirius originally wanted Stern so badly that it gave him the most
lucrative radio contract ever, a five-year deal that started in 2006
and paid him $500 million in cash and stock.

Stern accounts for about $80 million of Sirius' annual programming
costs, which have totaled $365 million over the past four quarters.
The $80 million covers Stern's salary, wages for his staff and
production and operating expenses, according to filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The remainder of the contract was
paid in stock.

Sherry in Vermont

1/15/2010 4:50:00 AM

On 2010-01-14 20:24:44 -0500, Brad Greer <jjh1102us@yahoo.com> said:

>> He's kinda weird that way, he's apt to talk about his past, yet he
>> tries to keep his "present" on the down low. I guess he's concerned
>> with rabid fans/stalkers and such. Probably a legitimate concern
>> given his audience, lol. ;-)
>
> The first wife's miscarriage was the day after it happened. I think
> the fact that it pissed her off so much has a lot to do with cutting
> down on talking about some of his personal life.

I think that, and the fact that he has kids now - not as funny when
they are at risk, maybe.

Sherry in Vermont

comp.lang.ruby

Ruby equivalent of Lex (or Flex)?

Tom Payne

Justin Collins

MenTaLguY

Doug H

marcman

marcman

marcman

Sherry in Vermont

x Login to ForumsZone